Teen Arrested for Home-Made "Hot or Not" List on Facebook

[D_987]

I was bullied mercilessly for the greater part of 6 years, and so were many of my friends. I spent more time at school being picked on than not. That is exactly how I know that words can't hurt you. yeah yeah yeah, waaaaa, my feelings got hurt. A lot. I got over it because at the end of the day, nothing they say means anything about me or anyone else. I am what and who I am, and I can tell you for sure that bullying never left any permanent scars on anyone with enough maturity to fill a thimble.

Good for you, your personal experience really doesn't apply here in any meaningful way; in fact I'd argue it's clouded your judgement regarding the way people react to abuse. This entire argument pretty much stems to "people shouldn't complain because I say so and if they do they aren't mature".

Again, it doesn't work like that. People react differently; and in this case some of the people involved were offended at the level of abuse received; your argument fails to take into account basic human actions - especially those of school children - and extends to a level of letting people get away with abuse because everyone must feel the same way you do.

 

[jakefongloo]

I had a feeling the "right to free speech" excuse would rear it's patriotic head at some point.

No matter how you look at it at whatever level you tend to automatically categorise it on, it is sexual harassment pure and simple. This is pretty offensive and if Joe Law steps in heavy handed to take a stand against this infantile mess to set an example then so be it.

I too am a little surprised at a lot of posts regarding how it's "all a bit of fun and harmless"
Perhaps but lets be honest here; you'd feel fairly fracking offended if you were to be labelled like this bozo has done to other people.

Sure we all think about the odd innuendo in our minds and it's perfectly natural to think of a human in a sexual form in the general. But to bring it out brazenly to this level, into a sickening depraved format for the public eye and ultimately humiliated? Take it elsewhere and never darken our door of society again.

Sorry but while I respect the idea of free speech, I dislike it when it's used in the context of "seeing what I can get away with without having any regards for my actions"

I'm sorry we'll get rid of it just because you don't like it.
Nothing that is supposed to be fair cannot be abused.
And I'm not arguing that this wasn't sexual harrassment. But have you been to a highschool lately? Worse shit than this goes on.
Some kid said he was "bullied" so after he graduated he went back a year later and masterbated on some kids underwear in the school gym locker. I would take a list than to have dude spooge on my underwear

 

[Eri]

Let me try to make something clear.

People do not, I repeat do not, have the right to not be offended.

Under who's jurisdiction? Your own?

They certainly have the right to tell the dumbass to fuck off or whatever variety thereof they wish to use, but that doesn't involve bringing in the police and criminal charges.

Seems they did; and the guy has been, apparently, charged - again, under what jurisdiction are you arguing this point?

People that get insulted don't usually enjoy it. You're right there. Just because you don't enjoy something doesn't mean you have the right to demand it cease to exist.

They have the right to complain about it certainly; though lets extend your flawed argument to something else - murder for example.

"Just because you don't enjoy something doesn't mean you have the right to demand it cease to exist."

I guess people don't have to right to demand murder not exist...

Under the god damn US Constitution and all of the laws that followed. There isn't a single law that was violated, except debatably libel, which isn't a criminal case and requires 0 police involvement.

The fact that was he was charged with anything is a gross violation of public trust and whatever laws they bent to make it stick.

Also, nice try with the murder strawman. That's a completely separate ballgame, and you know it.

This. This is a disgusting violation of the law. I'm about to be a police officer myself, and if I was ordered to arrest this kid, I'd debate-ably refuse the order or at the very least make my feelings known to my superior.

 

[antipunt]

I don't really know much about all the legality issues; what I'm more intrigued by is the fact that the guy was clearly eager to garner attention. If he wanted to deliver the prank anonymously, it could have easily been done. He wanted to be in the spotlight, and he succeeded. Did he...ehh...not expect to be roasted or what, I'm probably missing something here >_>

 

[Agayek]

It's called defamation of character, a serious and chargeable offense as it could ultimately effect (most likely damaging) the employment opportunities of the defamed parties, that is why it's not stupid, farm-ville is stupid, double standards are stupid, petroleum companies spending billions on anti-climate change scare tactic propaganda is stupid; punishing people that damage someones ability to be gainfully employed isn't stupid.

True, but defamation is a civil offense. It's simply not punishable by jail time. At worst, they could fine him for whatever damages could be caused by his list. Since they are in high school, the potential damages is likely to be relatively low, on a per-case basis.

Actually arresting him is ridiculous and a complete overreaction, not to mention a violation of the very laws you're arguing for.

 

[Mr.Petey]

"Disorderly Conduct" seems to now mean "Something that someone complains about."

Edit:

Yoink

Do you mind not doing that? Thanks but if I wanted to add more to my post and edit it as you did for me, I would have. Thank you for the thought but I'm fine the way it is thanks

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

Yay for overreaction!

i'm glad someone still has some good mood !

 

[YesYesYesandYes]

This pretty much demonstrates why Feminism is still strongly needed in Western society. Treating young girls like grades of meat and rating them on their sexual characteristics like it was the only thing they would ever be worth is so grotesquely abhorrent.

It definitely warrants legal action. This idiot caused a great deal of grievous mental and emotional anguish on so many of these girls publicly. That kind of behavior can not be condoned by any authority that hopes to remain credible.

Unless this is sarcasm... I'll say this and blow some minds... Women rate men to. Le Gasp!

 

[D_987]

Under the god damn US Constitution and all of the laws that followed. There isn't a single law that was violated, except debatably libel, which isn't a criminal case and requires 0 police involvement.

Then why was he charged with disorderly conduct? Perhaps there's more to the case than the limited Escapist article is letting on?

Also, nice try with the murder strawman. That's a completely separate ballgame, and you know it.

It's merely a way to prove how flawed your basic argument is.

 

[Agayek]

Good for you, your personal experience really doesn't apply here in any meaningful way; in fact I'd argue it's clouded your judgement regarding the way people react to abuse. This entire argument pretty much stems to "people shouldn't complain because I say so and if they do they aren't mature".

Again, it doesn't work like that. People react differently; and in this case some of the people involved were offended at the level of abuse received; your argument fails to take into account basic human actions - especially those of school children - and extends to a level of letting people get away with abuse because everyone must feel the same way you do.

I will actually agree with you here, surprisingly enough. I, personally, find being offended by what someone else calls you to be more than a bit ridiculous, but if that's how they want to deal with it, that's their prerogative.

That doesn't mean, however, that they can abuse the laws to meet their whims. Yes, you were offended by it. Good for you. That doesn't mean you can throw him in prison because he called you a name.

 

[Dimitriov]

Was the kid an ass? Yes, obviously.

Should the police be intervening in this? HELL NO!

Welcome to the nanny state. You hurt somebody's feelings so you have to go to prison.

 

[Gabe Koszegi]

Okay, so suspend him for sexism, expel him for racism but the police have no place at all in this case. It's just stupid high school stuff and nothing for everyone to get so worked up about. We live in a patriarchal society but feminism isn't going to make things better, it'll probably make things worse. How about equality instead?

Either way, it's not the states case anymore, it's the people who want to sue and who would get sued, police involvement is a waste of state money.

Yeah he did a stupid childish thing but he doesn't deserve jail or the hassle and expenses of court, the expulsion was enough.

 

[Double A]

He's an asshole, and they're putting him in jail for that. Last time I checked, being an asshole, especially on the Internet, was extremely legal. WTF?

Going to juvi for calling people names on facebook, when did peoples spines dissolve.

Shortly after the Soviet Union.

 

[D_987]

That doesn't mean, however, that they can abuse the laws to meet their whims. Yes, you were offended by it. Good for you. That doesn't mean you can throw him in prison because he called you a name.

That's not up to those abused to decide, it's up to the courts - you're getting the two mixed up.

 

[ADDLibrarian]

Yes, this kid is a douche. I was originally going to say that the arrest was an overreaction, but the more I think about it, this could be considered cyber bullying or cyber harassment...so yeah, he's gonna get what's coming to him. Yay for karma!!! ^___^

 

[Agayek]

Then why was he charged with disorderly conduct? Perhaps there's more to the case than the limited Escapist article is letting on?

Certainly possible. If there is more to it, it's not readily available. I can only draw conclusions from what data I have. If further information comes to light where the kid did actually violate a criminal law, then I would agree that he should be tried for it. As it stands however, that does not appear to be the case.

I'm more than willing to change my stance when new information arises. The problem is that it hasn't.

It's merely a way to prove how flawed your basic argument is.

There was nothing flawed with the basic premise I presented. If someone is doing something you do not enjoy and/or find offensive, and it does not violate any laws, you do not have the right to stop them. Period. What they're doing may be in very poor taste, or offensive, or rude, or any of a billion other things, but as long as it is not illegal, you do not have the right to involve the judicial system in resolving the dispute.

You do, however, have the right to scream at them until they go away.

You see the difference there? One is resolving a problem that does not violate the social contract between yourselves. The other is abusing the nature of the aforementioned social contract to further your own ends.

 

[Baldr]

I think "disorderly conduct" is stretching the bounds. Since this was strictly a sexual harassment case involving the school, it should have been handled under the school district guidelines on sexual harassment. Any libelous things should be dealt with between the boy's parents and those charging him with libel in civil court.

 

[krugerrand123]

I am surprised how much free time he had to be able to make that list.